11-07-2007 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES -FINAL
7 November 2007
Committee Members Present:
Committee Members Absent:
Jon Califf
Donnie DeWees
Craig Wheeler
Joe Woollett
Bill Cathcart
Staff in Attendance: Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney
Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner, Historic Preservation
Robert Garcia, Associate Planner
Doris Nguyen, Associate Planner
Sonal Thakur, Assistant Planner
Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary
Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M.
The Committee met for an administrative session beginning at 5:15 p.m. Chair Wheeler asked
about item #7, where there were two issues to resolve, whether there would need to be two
motions for this item. Mr. Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney, responded they could do that or
apply the motion to both issues. Committee Member DeWees asked for the additional
information on the Prestininzi Residence. The Committee reviewed the additional information.
Committee Member Woollett clarified whether they could move an item to the consent section.
Chair Wheeler responded that they could not move the item; however, the item could be
approved without discussion. The item could be handled in this manner when it came up on the
Agenda.
Administrative Session closed at 5:25 p.m.
Regular Session - 5:30 P.M.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:07 p.m. to the next regular scheduled meeting on
Wednesday, November 21, 2007.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Opportunity for members of the public to
matters not listed on the Agenda.
address the Design Review Committee on
No public attendees addressed the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the
Agenda.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 2 of 18
CONSENT ITEMS:
All matters that are announced as Consent Items are considered to be routine by the
Design Review Committee and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate
discussion of said items unless members of the Design Review Committee, staff or the
public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Items for separate action.
1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NONE
2) DRC No. 4280-07 -ORANGE SQUARE FACADE CHANGE
A proposal to expand the canopy of an existing building.
1805-1845 E. Chapman Avenue
Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC No. 4280-07, Orange Square
Facade change by consent, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report.
SECOND: Jon Califf
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Bill Cathcart
MOTION CARRIED.
3) DRC No. 4286-07 -FRESH & EASY SIGNAGE
A proposal to change the existing sign program to allow new signage for a new grocery
store at an existing commercial center.
146 S. Main Street
Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Committee Member DeWees made a motion to approve DRC No. 4286-07, Fresh & Easy
signage by consent, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report.
SECOND: Joe Woollett
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Bill Cathcart
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 3 of 18
AGENDA ITEMS:
4) DRC No. 4225-07 - McCAUSLAND RESIDENCE
A proposal for a second story addition to an existing single-story residence.
1021 Rose Avenue
Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239 sthakur@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Staff Assistant Planner Sonal Thakur provided a project overview consistent with the Staff
Report.
Applicant, Drew McCausland, address on file, stated they had taken into consideration the
DRC's suggestions and had made changes accordingly. The changes included moving the
second-story back behind the ridge which gave asingle-story element in the front, the roof had
been rotated 90 degrees to reduce the mass and scale, plate height had been lowered, and the
stucco and gable vents had been added to match the existing house. It was noted on the plans
that the siding, windows, and paint colors would match the existing house. Grass landscaping
added and noted in the plot plans. With the changes to the design the floor area ratio was 2%
larger than the largest lot on the street.
Public Comment
None.
Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee.
Committee Member Califf asked what generated the particular design for the grass area.
Mr. McCausland stated that it was generated by the recommendations by the DRC and the gravel
area would be used to park a motor home.
Committee Member DeWees made some further suggestions on lawn and shrub areas.
Chair Wheeler stated he had recommended that the vents match the existing property; however,
looking at the design, triangular vents might look better. The Committee reviewed the new
drawing and plans.
Committee Member Califf asked Staff if all zoning issues had been satisfied. Ms. Thakur
responded that yes they had been satisfied.
Chair Wheeler asked Staff in reviewing the property profiles had there been any attempt to
determine how many of the assessor's profiles were accurate. Ms. Thakur stated staff had gone
through available microfiche and on the records listed only the square footage of the original
house was contained in the records. On the property at 934 E. Rose it went up .25 from .21 so
there were cases where square footage had been added but not noted in the property profiles.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 4 of 18
Committee Member Woollett stated he had concerns about the second-story as there were not
others in the area. The applicant had been responsive to suggestions to mitigate the second-story.
It was still asecond-story, in looking at it from the west side it was still very apparent and he felt
it would be a mistake to allow asecond-story to be built in the area.
Committee Member Califf asked if they wanted any further landscape review, possibly more
description in plant materials, irrigation, and shrub placement. Chair Wheeler stated it would be
a good idea to have Staff review any landscape plans.
Committee Member Califf made a motion to approve DRC No. 4225-07, McCausland
Residence, with the following conditions:
1. To change round gable vents with triangular vents or something different.
2. The applicant to provide specific landscape and irrigation information on the plot
plan.
SECOND: Donnie DeWees
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler
NOES: Joe Woollett
ABSENT: Bill Cathcart
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 5 of 18
5) DRC No. 4227-07 - GALLERIA L'ORANGE
A proposal to change the exterior colors and material for the existing commercial center.
Proposal includes changes to the approved Fresh & Easy approved colors.
130-146 S. Main Street
Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Staff Associate Planner Robert Garcia provided a project overview consistent with the Staff
Report.
Applicant, Pete Kutzer, address on file, stated that the Staff had done a good job in assisting with
a project that was good for the center, good for the tenants, and good for the community.
Public Comment
None.
Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee.
Committee Member Woollett asked for color samples to review. Mr. Garcia pointed out the
colors that would be used, noting the color Roman Brick had been eliminated. He also brought
forth a sample of the slate that would be used in the design.
Chair Wheeler was confused on note #6, which stated remove existing the to add a plaster base,
the drawings seem to be showing a plaster base and also the color Roman Brick was still listed
on the drawings. Mr. Kutzer stated there would be a the base and the Roman Brick color had
been changed.
Committee Member DeWees stated the color board was correct. The Committee reviewed the
color board. Mr. Garcia stated the color sequence was listed on the cover sheet.
Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4227-07, Galleria L'Orange, with the
following additional condition:
That the bases be the in accordance with the Staff Report and not the plaster that was
noted in the drawings.
SECOND:Joe Woollett
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 6 of 18
6) DRC No. 4267-07 & MNSP No. 0525-07 -WELLS FARGO BANK BUILDING
A proposal to construct a 6,064 sq. ft. bank building to replace the one that burned down.
2535 N. Tustin Street
Staff Contact: Doris Nguyen, 714-744-7223, dnguyen@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Staff Associate Planner Doris Nguyen provided a project overview consistent with the Staff
Report.
Applicant, Brett Marchi and Paul Kielsmeier, addresses on file, were present to answer any
questions. Mr. Kliesmeier stated that Wells Fargo was anxious to begin full business again as
they had lost approximately 75% of business banking customers as they were unable to handle
the business transactions at the temporary trailer sites. They had been working hard and long
with Staff to get approval, as the intent was to open by the second quarter and would accept any
recommendations for conditions of approval from the DRC.
Public Comment
None.
Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee.
Committee Member Woollett asked how they were able to eliminate the parking area on the
south side of the building and still meet parking requirements. Mr. Marchi stated it worked to
have the parking toward the center and the bank to be located toward the corner. The layout was
much better with the new design.
Chair Wheeler was concerned about the color scheme as it seemed to differ from the other
buildings in the center.
Mr. Marchi stated Wells Fargo had a standard color palette and was used for the design; if there
was a big objection to the colors it could be changed. He also noted that on the tower elements,
on the west side, there had been signs; what is proposed now, is to add windows that would
match the east side elevations.
Chair Wheeler stated on the west elevation, reviewing the drawings, it was shown as a hip and a
gable on the front elevation. Mr. Marchi stated that it should be a gable end. Chair Wheeler
wondered if it would look softer if there was a hip at each end.
1VIs. Nguyen stated the other buildings in the center had more rounded gable designs.
Chair Wheeler was concerned with the arches, and how they appeared to just blend right into a
wall. Mr. Marchi pointed out on the drawings the connection to the street and the stairway off of
Tustin and the arches that were added as a walkway.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 7 of 18
Ms. Nguyen asked if the Committee had a recommendation for the color scheme.
Committee Member Woollett commented that he liked the colors.
Committee Member DeWees stated that he was fine with the colors, and the addition of windows
would add to the design. Regarding the wainscotting on the towers, they were tall with a small
footing from a proportional standpoint and had they considered moving it up to the door height
and it was just a suggestion.
Mr. Marchi asked if it would be on the west side and wrap around the corner. Committee
Member DeWees stated it would be on the west and north elevations. On the entry the pilasters
seemed thin. Widen the pilasters for the entry facing the north. In reviewing the drawings and
figuring out the arch, one seemed steep while the other seemed flat. In calculating the arch, the
radius of the segmented arch should be the width of the opening so they would all be the same
geometrically and they would all match. He also asked if they could find an alternative for the
foam cornice, either wood or no trim at all. Mr. Kielsmeier stated that they could take it off and
have a clean band or could have a reveal at the top. The mechanical equipment would still be
hidden behind the parapet. It would not be above the roofline.
Committee Member Woollett, looking at the landscape design, liked the idea of the planting on
the side of the building and asked what were the plans for future maintenance. Mr. Marchi stated
they would use a screen that had a green matte finish. Mr. Kielsmeier stated the product used
would be Green Screen which was made specifically for growing plant materials; it took into
consideration the heat element and was made of material that encouraged plant growth.
Senior Landscape Coordinator, Howard Morris stated the City required plant inspection notes
and the applicant would need to submit those for approval.
Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4267-07 and MNSP No. 0525-07, Wells
Fargo Bank Building, with the following conditions:
1. Arches at the ends of portico be omitted.
2. Omit cornice.
3. All arches to have the same proportions.
4. Landscape and irrigation plans to be submitted to the City for final approval.
5. Increase the width of the columns in the entryway.
SECOND:Donnie DeWees
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
RECUSED:None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 8 of 18
7) DRC No. 4270-07 - PRESTININZI RESIDENCE
A proposal for a new in-fill construction of a 718 sq. ft. single family residence to be
constructed on the front of an existing 622 sq. ft. addition. The DRC will also review
Historical & Architectural Assessments on the prior demolition.
804 E. Washington Avenue, Old Towne Historic District
Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
He stated there would be two actions; one to review and file the historic report and secondly to
make a final determination. Staff is looking at the project as a reconstruction, as there was not an
existing structure to mitigate and the issues had been resolved previously at a Staff level.
The applicants, Francine and Craig Prestininzi, address on file, were present.
Mr. Prestininzi stated that this had been a process that had begun three years ago. They had run
into a structural deficiency during a wall upgrade. When the contractor took out the doors and
windows, the structure collapsed. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and the City was not
notified. After reviewing the collapse with the contractor and taking various photos the only
thing the City had requested them to save were the studs as all other finishes per the permits were
to be new. They went forward with the assumption that they had received the necessary permits
for the work that needed to be done. A stop work order was received and for the past 18 months
he and his wife had been living in the back of the house working with the City to try to get the
process started again. Mr. Perstininzi stated that he had met with former residents, local
historians and research at the library to meet the historical standards. He asked the Committee to
allow them to go forward with the project; the plans were almost 100% of what they were before.
One change is that the house had been moved, after being informed by the City Attorney that
they had lost their legal right to rebuild on a portion of the property, they were denied a variance,
and forced to shift the residence over.
Public Comment
Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the replacement structure was
inmaterial. He felt that the project had not gone through the proper environmental reviews, as
this was the final determination. Was the City claiming an exemption from CEQA review, as
this was a project where permits had been issued this project was not exempt from CEQA
review. There must be an environmental review to mitigate the demolition of a historic resource
and establish some guidelines for reconstruction. The demolition was part of the project and had
not been addressed for Design Standards. The Design Standards state: the demolition of a
contributing structure must be reviewed by City Council. This had not occurred. It was the
OTPA's view that the City blatantly ignored its own preservation and demolition ordinances,
since neither was going to be discussed or applied to the project. He did agree that the City and
applicant must go forward and build something; however, the project could not be treated as a
simple in-fill project and ignoring the illegal demolition so it would not occur again. This
project must go through the legal review process so it would not happen again. The City of
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 9 of 18
Orange and its property owners had a huge investment in the district and needed to discourage
individuals from demolishing their contributing structures. If the applicant had come forward
with the project that included the demolition of the residence his project would have been denied.
We urge the City to apply the demolition and Design Standards to this project.
Mr. Prestininzi stated they had been living without a home for almost two years and have been
paying a penalty for an accident that happened on the job site.
Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
Mr. Ryan stated the Planning Manager and the City Attorney had discussed whether CEQA
applied and had made a determination that there was no resource so no mitigation issue. As it
seemed a departure from previous decisions, however based on their review they concluded that
since the resource was no longer available and the avenue to take would be reconstruction. It did
appear to be an issue between some preservationists and the determination of what the City
should do when a demolition would take place in a similar situation.
Committee Member Califf stated if it was a change in policy they would need to explain what
the difference was. It was not up to the Committee to decide whether something was demolished
intentionally and how did Staff come up with their determination.
Mr. Ryan had spoken with the Environmental Specialist, Jennifer Le, and it was determined that
the literature was reviewed and since the resource no longer existed there was not an opportunity
to mitigate it. No negative or mitigated declaration was required.
Committee Member DeWees questioned whether there was any documentation that presented
this explanation and had it been provided to anyone. Mr. Ryan stated there was an email and a
memo regarding the decision.
Mr. Ryan had spoken with Mr. Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney, and one of the difficulties on the
item was the issuance of a rehabilitation permit, it wasn't a direct demolition, but during the
process the structure caved in. It was difficult to prove that it was an intentional demolition. The
particulars of the item had been totally discussed between the City Attorney, Jennifer Le, and
other Staff involved.
Committee Member DeWees asked why the City was not better prepared. Clearly the applicant
and OTPA had completed their research and were ready to move forward. Mr. Ryan stated when
a property was demolished we would provide history research. If a person would come to the
City and request a demolition we would still require this particular information from them. His
understanding was to provide historical documentation, and this was a requirement to mitigate
the demolition, regardless whether it was intentional or not, and the information provided was
sufficient.
Committee Member DeWees stated the only documentation was the paragraph that read
environmental determination and that the project was Categorically Exempt from CEQA.
There was not a letter or a report that gave any further detail.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 10 of 18
Mr. Reynolds explained that the issue had been previously reviewed and Staff had not
anticipated that it would become an issue during the review of the project. Mr. Ryan stated there
had been conversations with the OTPA regarding when an Environmental Impact Report was not
required.
Mr. Frankel stated there was no formal discussion, just informal with Jennifer Le while attending
a conference together. They were told by one of the leading CEQA land use preservation
attorneys in the state, if permits were pulled that CEQA applied. Mitigation of the demolition
applied regardless of the demolition being intentional or unintentional. A historic resource had
been lost; the project should be treated as if the structure still stood. He felt the City had erred
and it needed to go through the proper channels and reviews.
Committee Member DeWees asked why City Council had not reviewed the issue. Mr. Frankel
felt the reason it had not been brought before City Council was due to the fact that City Staff had
made a determination since the resource no longer existed that CEQA could not be applied.
Mr. Reynolds stated that there was the ability to appeal the decisions made by the board.
Mr. Ryan stated once the demo took place, CEQA no longer applied and the project would be
treated as an in-fill project and it was the direction taken by Staff.
Committee Member Woollett felt he understood clearly the action that had been taken by the
City, and there had been similar situations. On projects where the structure was so unsound and
the idea, aside from any legal aspects, in keeping the building was not an option. Why would a
structure be preserved if there was nothing to preserve and there was precedent to be considered.
When a project was approved for reconstruction, it could be found that it could not work at all
and he felt that they had seen this issue in the past. It would be inappropriate to not consider the
fact that there was a building that was not serviceable, and it could have been taken apart piece
by piece with some salvage, but he understood the Department of Interior's Standards allowed
for different conditions and different approaches to be taken. He felt the City should
acknowledge that there were different approaches to be taken based on the historical significance
of the building. The historical finding stated that no important person resided in the residence.
When something was gone it could not be mitigated.
Mr. Prestininzi stated the only historical remnants were the roof trusses and siding. The siding
was made of vertical 1 X 12's which were termite infested; they had permits for 9' ceilings and
the new roof. If the phone call had been made to notify the City of their findings what would
have been the process, would they have been required to preserve the 1 X 12's inside of the new
walls. If that was the mitigation process he did not understand how this would assist anyone.
Committee Member Califf stated that projects needed to be looked at on a case-by-case basis and
what had been lost. Single wall construction was not that uncommon in the City, they were
found in the built-by-yourself type of houses. There were ways to construct using the existing 1
X 12's and there had been successful remediations. Mr. Prestininzi stated that the vertical siding
was completely unusable. Committee Member Califf stated that because he was the only one
that determined that they could not make a judgment on that issue. They wanted to avoid
making decisions that would encourage midnight demolitions that had occurred in the past and
establish a clear process on dealing with those types of issues.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 11 of 18
Committee Member DeWees stated when the Committee received their binders and reviewed the
items they knew this project would have issues. He had driven by the site several times, the
OTPA had come prepared, the applicant had come prepared and in reviewing the item the City
did not seem prepared. He felt it was unfair to the applicant and to OTPA's efforts. The
Committee needed to solve it for them, to resolve it so the applicant could have their home and
have some type of precedent set for future issues that would come before the Committee.
Mr. Ryan stated he agreed and that the Committee needed to hear from the personnel that made
the decisions in a different arena. It was up to the Committee to look at the items before them
and make a finding based on the application.
Committee Member Woollett stated they should look very carefully at what they were being
asked to do, in looking at the historical review and assessment it would have to be accepted
before they could make a determination on the proposed replacement and not make a
determination based on the legal issues. He suggested that they act on item #1 first which dealt
with the historical resource and physical assessment. He felt the building was in very bad
condition and in a historical resource category and it would not require any extraordinary
preservation measure.
Chair Wheeler clarified on the historical resources page, the shed-like addition was written as
being on the west side and should be listed as the east side. Mr. Prestininzi stated it should be
corrected to read east side. Chair Wheeler asked the Committee to act on item #1.
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to accept the historical resource and physical
assessment on DRC No. 4270-07, Prestininzi Residence.
SECOND:Donnie DeWees
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
RECUSED:None
Committee Member Califf asked what the siding would be made from. Mr. Prestininzi stated it
would be 6" lapped siding to match the existing back portion of the residence. Committee
Member Califf stated it would not have been approved on the original permit.
Chair Wheeler noted that on the original application it was written as 6" wood lapped siding. He
had concerns about the front porch and would this be rebuilt. Mr. Prestininzi stated it would be
rebuilt. There would be 4 X 4 columns with latticework in between, the proportions of the
residence changed. The pop out buffet would also be removed. The front residence was raised
floor and in moving the house over 2 feet, there were water and utility lines that ran the length of
the house, to avoid having to move these they were going to install slab on grate. With the last
permit it called for raised flooring.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 12 of 18
Committee Member Woollett stated the requirement for foundation walls did not require deep
footing. Mr. Prestininzi stated in order to have a crawl space, they needed 10" joist with another
foot below that. Committee Member Woollett felt he could not approve this without a raised
floor and asked if the residence that was demolished had a raised floor.
Mr. Prestininzi stated the finished floor was going to be the same regardless of having a raised
floor or slab on grade. To achieve the proper footing and crawl space they had to dig down and
the grade of the flooring did not change, it did not have a very deep crawl space.
Committee Member Califf stated they were looking at this project in two ways; what had been
there and then as a new in-fill design and was it important to raise the floor. Should they be
replicating what was there or creating a new in-fill structure. Committee Member Woollett was
concerned about how it would visually affect the height.
Mr. Prestininzi stated that visually it would not affect the height. The demarcation between the
existing and old slab on grade was at the same level as the raised floor and they would just be
matching it. Committee Member Woollett asked if there were any footings and what was the
condition of the soil. Mr. Prestininzi stated that there had been concrete pumped under the house
in one area and they found concrete piers in various areas. When they initially moved in there
were sloped areas in the flooring. He also stated he would need to find a soils engineer to
determine the compaction.
Committee Member Califf asked how had it happened with the previous approval having slab on
grade and what had the Committee previously approved. The Committee Members reviewed the
plans and Committee Member DeWees noted the previous approval read exposed concrete
footing to match historical standards.
Chair Wheeler felt the original design was cottage style and it was being turned into a craftsman
style. He did not like the outlookers or the stone area, as this residence was a cottage and not a
craftsman and he would ask the applicant to move in the direction of the original residence. Mr.
Prestininzi stated they would be happy to make any changes that Staff recommended. Committee
Member DeWees suggested that they had recommended dialing the stone back from the bottom
and just placing it on two columns.
Mr. Prestininzi asked if they could add a window to the front portion of the house. Chair
Wheeler stated that he did not have a problem with the window addition.
Mr. Ryan stated there was a difference in looking at the project as an in-fill or as new
construction. Committee Member Califf clarified that they should be looking at the project as an
in-fill.
Committee Member DeWees asked if they moved on the project what the City would do about
the other issues that were brought up. Mr. Ryan stated if the Committee determines that it
should be a replica of what had been there previously they would go in that direction. Staff was
looking at the project as an in-fill project based on the environmental review.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 13 of 18
Chair Wheeler stated the project should be treated as a design issue and the legal aspects would
be subject to an appeal and it should be approved or denied based on the design issues of the
project.
Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve item #2 on DRC No. 4270-07, Prestininzi Residence,
subject to the additional conditions:
1. Outlookers shown on the drawings be removed.
2. The underside of the extended barges and eves be treated the same as on the original
structure.
3. The stone on the base of the porch columns be omitted and the porch columns remain
as close as possible to the original porch.
4. An additional window be added to the west side of the building.
5. Siding on the structure should match the siding on the back house.
SECOND:Joe Woollett
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None.
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
RECUSED:None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 14 of 18
8) DRC No. 4281-07 -RAKER RESIDENCE
A proposal for window and door modifications to an existing 1918 Bungalow.
492 N. Olive Street, Old Towne Historic District
Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a~cityoforange.org
Item continued from DRC meeting of October 3, 2007
DRC Action: Final Determination
Staff Senior Planner, Dan Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report
noting that the applicant had returned to discuss the placement and type of window being
installed over the kitchen sink area.
Applicant, Jim Becker, address on file, reviewed the plans with Staff. He stated they determined
that there had been an addition to the residence and placing a larger single window would look
much better aesthetically from the outside. From the inside it would give more cabinet room in
the microscopic kitchen.
Chair Wheeler asked if it would be possible to move the existing double window over.
Mr. Ryan stated that there was the option to recycle the existing windows. Mr. Becker stated
that the windows were in very bad shape and the property owner wanted to eventually replace all
the windows in the house. They had been to Renaissance Windows and had schematics drawn
up to recreate the existing windows.
Public Comment
Janet Crenshaw, address on file, representing OTPA, stated that she felt the existing windows
that do not slide up and down could be repaired.
Jeff Frankel, address on file, representin O~TPA, stated they would like to see existing historic
fabric remain; existing windows especially since they were functional. He felt it was not
necessary to install new windows.
Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
Committee Member Califf stated there were people who could rehabilitate the old windows and
make them functional. As far as energy efficiency, that would not be a consideration, when it
comes down to replacing existing historic fabric. Using the existing windows would be his
preference.
Mr. Becker asked where Title 24 would come into place. Committee Member Califf stated it
would take effect on a new addition.
Chair Wheeler stated in taking out the sliding door and adding a much smaller door the applicant
would be in a much better situation than what it was. Mr. Becker, referring to the drawings,
pointed out the vinyl windows that would be replaced with wood.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 15 of 18
Committee Member Califf clarified the concern was with existing windows that they be
preserved if possible. Mr. Becker stated he preferred one larger window in the kitchen area; if it
was the determination of the Committee to keep the existing windows he would redesign the
kitchen around those windows. Committee Members agreed that would be the best solution.
Committee Member DeWees made a motion to approve DRC No. 4281-07, Raker Residence,
with the exception of changing out of the kitchen window and utilizing the existing windows.
SECOND:Craig Wheeler
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
RECUSED:None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 16 of 18
9) DRC No. 4290-07 - GLOS RESIDENCE
A proposal fora 395 sq. ft. one-story addition (exceeds 20% of existing floor area) and
220 sq. ft. rear porch on an existing 1,664 sq. ft. one-story contributing Hip Roofed
Cottage.
816 E. Culver Avenue, Old Towne Historic District
Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission
Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
Applicant, Kurt Beckmeyer, address on file, stated he had worked closely with the client and
Staff. He noted that the detail on the door design was not complete and they would come up
with something that was complimentary with the existing doors and the screen details would also
match. He agreed with the conditions and recommendations made by Staff.
Public Comment
Janet Crenshaw, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the project had a good design and
the barn was very nice.
Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated this was a good positive project and
there was good attention to detail. It was sensitive to the streetscape.
Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
Chair Wheeler asked about the pitch of the shed roof. Mr. Beckmeyer stated there were height
restrictions on the original construction of the house, and it would have been a continuation of
the primary roof plane. As the addition was kept separate from the original house it led them to
the tucking under of the roof. Chair Wheeler stated this was a foreign element that did not exist
anywhere else. Mr. Beckmeyer stated that on the addition it was tucked under the roofline.
Chair Wheeler suggested a hip roof to match pitch for the shed area. He asked if doors would be
added to the screened porch. Mr. Beckmeyer stated there would be screen doors.
Chair Wheeler, in pointing out the back screened porch, was concerned that they would run into
steel on the lateral forces, could there be another approach that would not require steel Mr.
Beckmeyer stated they tried to keep the screened porch as open as possible. He did not have a
concern about getting steel tubes in the corner without being seen. Chair Wheeler suggested
something less informal for the screened-in porch, to add a Dutch gable seemed too formal.
Committee Member Woollett asked on the site plan there was impervious pavement around the
back and the barn. Mr. Beckmeyer stated it was all existing and shown for calculation purposes
only.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 17 of 18
Chair Wheeler made a motion to recommend to the Planning Commission approval of DRC No.
4290-07, Glos Residence, with the following condition:
1. To add hip roof over shed area to match the main residence.
SECOND:Joe Woollett
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:Bill Cathcart
RECUSED:None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2007
Page 18 of 18
ADJOURNMENT:
A motion was made by Committee Member DeWees to adjourn to the next regular meeting on
Wednesday, November 21, 2007.
SECOND: Jon Califf
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bill Cathcart
RECUSED: None
MOTION CARRIED.